California Signs Bill Requiring Public Colleges To Provide 'Medical Abortions'

Democratic California Governor Gavin Newsom signed what may possibly be the most controversial abortion law in the nation on Friday as he approved state legislation which requires all public colleges and universities to provide the abortion pill for students who want to kill their fetus via medically induced miscarriage within ten weeks of pregnancy:

Governor Newsom told the LA Times that California is "removing barriers to reproductive health -- increasing access on college campuses and using technology to modernize how patients interact with providers."

"As other states and the federal government go backward, restricting reproductive freedom, in California we are moving forward, expanding access and reaffirming a woman’s right to choose," he added.

California students who support the bill argue they simply need the taxpayer provided medicated abortion because traveling to a clinic is too much of a burden to bear.
​

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timot...c-colleges-to-provide-abortion-pills-n2554611


"The morning after pill" is one thing, but this sounds like the "70 days after" pill.

Seems like they're just throwing these Abortion-inducing pills out like candy now.
We're talking about 18 and 19-year-old young women in college.

 

Good for Newsom !!! Helping young people stay on track for success in their future lives


No, they are not handing them out like candy, only to those who need them. Where TF did you get the idea they were "handing them out like candy" ?????


And, GEE, we're talking about 18 and 19 year old women !? Well DUH, aren't those the ones in college?

...and what TF does their age have to do with it ?????

 

Which is it, do y'all want this issue relegated back to the states or not?
This is far less barbaric than arresting children that abort after being raped like we are seeing in republican led states.

 

That seems like an example of pro-choicers trying to deflect & derail again.

If you want to discuss rape, take it to one of the other threads about rape.
most women who were raped do NOT want to abort the baby
Testimonies from people conceived in rape

 

Need? What's your definition of "need" ?

Oh here we go, I think you answered that:

In other words, kill the fetus so she can stay on track with her studies.

Tell me, where are the grandparents in all of this? The woman's parents, and the parents of the guy who got her pregnant.

And I suppose even an adoption wouldn't be good enough for you, since it might require her taking one or two semesters off.​

 

My definition? Whatever HER need is.....the woman decides what her need is...NOT YOU!

YUPPERS!


​

What TF do they have to do with it?

Are THEY pregnant???

Pregnancy does not simply involved "one or two semesters off"". Pregnancy is NINE months, didn't you know that? !!!!!!!

Those 9 months leave permanent damage to the woman's body and affect her LIFE.

If she CHOOSES to do that, that's fine but it's HER choice, not yours.​

 

Some women in college get raped....and end up pregnant and need an abortion...



No, they are not handing them out like candy, only to those who need them. Where TF did you get the idea they were "handing them out like candy" ?????




And, GEE, we're talking about 18 and 19 year old women !? Well DUH, aren't those the ones in college?

...and what TF does their age have to do with it ?????

 

I thought we weren't going to talk about rape.
Are you going to derail my thread too? Oh wait, rhetorical question...


Are college women somehow different than other women who get raped?

 

These women don't need an abortion at 70 weeks.

 

This has nothing to do with the “morning after pill”, it’s an entirely different product. I think it’s important to have a proper understanding of what is actually being talked about before you discuss it.

I don’t see where you’re getting that from. This is something that is already available at off-campus health centres, the only change is to make it a requirement of on-campus health centres. There is nothing to suggest the will be proscribed any more freely, only that it will be available from the students local healthcare provider.

For what it’s worth, I’ve always be concerned about this form of abortion being provided without sufficient medical support and observation but that’s a general issue. If anything, having the provider closer to the patients home would be an improvement in that even if nothing else changed.

All the more reason to provide all services for them in on-campus health centres which will be more used to treating young students and where the patients will hopefully be more comfortable and therefore better placed to calmly consider all of their options.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
No, they are not handing them out like candy,AS YOU CLAIM... only to those who need them.

YOU are NOT the Ruler of When Women Need an Abortion...get over it

 

From the OP : """We're talking about 18 and 19-year-old young women in college.""""




FoxHastings said: ↑
...and what TF does their age have to do with it ?????

Did everyone follow that exchange?

A. OP mentions the girls age, B. I ask what their age has to do with it and C.

LIKE A TYPICAL ANTI-CHOICER WITH NO ARGUMENT OR GOOD ANSWER he twists what I ASKED him into me handing out abortion pills in middle school.



WHY do Anti-Choicers have to do this? Because they have nothing to use, no argument, to take away women's right to their own bodies so they need to "manipulate" what others say...


OR, OP was soooo embarrassed that he didn't know 18 and 19 year olds usually make up the majority of college students ...LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!

 

Certainly they should have access to the morning after pill, but as your banana cheers for tax payers being forced to pay for pills, just remember that when you have to pay for a wall some politician deems necessary.


BTW, there is a new birth control pill a woman can take before sex. They are chewable and come in mint flavor. They're called.....


Predickamints!

 

As long as there is sufficient consumer information included with the pill so that those young women know about potential side effects and health concerns, and advice on when they would be wise to ask their own doctor before taking that pill, I am ok with it. All of that stuff is probably already sitting in the packaging.

I see this as primarily a medical issue.

 

I see no problem with this new law, provided that the following occurs:

 

Is it not obvious ? - in the case of an unintended pregnancy - there is a need for the abortion pill.

1) what is wrong will killing a fetus in the early term
2) Permission from the grandparents and parents is not required - (we call it "individual liberty" )
3) Why should a young person in college - disrupt their studies for 2 semesters - and endure major physical stress and the changes that come with pregnancy - over an unintended pregnancy - when this can be remedied by a pill ?

 

That is a point in which the Pro-Life position generally disagrees.

Even not all Pro-Choicers agree it is truly absolutely a "need".

 

All on the Pro -Choice side - by definition - agree that it is an absolute need.

Who cares what the Pro-Life position thinks - as their position is a violation of logic, reason and the founding principles.

 

That's not correct. Some of them believe the woman personally does not need to make that choice, but believe others need to allow her to make it.

 

It is a need if the pregnant woman says it is.

YOU do not get to dictate what others need.


Show me where a Pro-Choicer says it isn't a need ….

 

Then they are not Pro-Choice - by definition ... get a grip.

 

Where do you get that? Some of them believe the woman does not need to make that choice but that she should get to choose.

Maybe you are misunderstanding me?
Either that or you're being as blatently disingenuous as FoxHastings (which is out of character for you, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that's not the case).

(Maybe you're getting confused by the wording? I mean these pro-choicers do not necessarily believe a woman in that situation needs to have an abortion)

 

Don't make such nasty accusations - you know who you are talking to .. and it isn't Fox .. and your match record against me is bleak.

"Some of them believing the woman does not need to make a choice" - this is gibberish - of course the woman does not need to make the choice or be forced into an abortion. Pro Choice does not mean believe that she has to choose to abort ..

Who cares what these people believe with respect to the woman's choice - This has nothing to do with question of the need for the morning after pill to be available. - should the woman make the choice to abort?

 

I didn't say that. You misunderstood what I was saying.

I said "Some of them believe the woman does not need to make that choice".

I hope you can see what I was saying and we don't get trapped in a semantic argument.

('that choice' referring to a woman's choice to have an abortion, not the choice whether or not to have an abortion)

Let me try phrasing it in one more way.
They believe she should have the choice whether or not to have an abortion, not that she needs to make the choice to have an abortion. They can still believe her choosing abortion was the wrong choice, or that she did not have a need to have an abortion.

The English language can be kind of ambiguous here, probably what resulted in the confusion. Please tell me you understand now.

 

You are the one getting trapped in semantics .. nothing in the misunderstanding you are going on about has anything to do with the question of whether or not there is a need for the morning after pill to be available. .. and this was made clear in my post.